1. Value conflicts and assumptions - 1 While an author usually offers explicit reasons why he comes to a certain conclusion, he also makes (implicit) assumptions leading to it, on the basis of his values. While an author usually offers explicit reasons why he comes to a certain conclusion, he also makes (implicit) assumptions leading to it, on the basis of his values. By identifying value conflicts, we determine whether the author’s value preferences match our own, and can then dispute them. By identifying value conflicts, we determine whether the author’s value preferences match our own, and can then dispute them.

2. Value conflicts and assumptions - 2 Value assumptions usually are: Value assumptions usually are: –Hidden or unstated (in most cases). –Taken for granted. –Influential in determining the conclusion. –Potentially deceptive.

3. Value conflicts and assumptions - 3 Clues for finding them: Clues for finding them: –Investigate the author’s background. –Ask “Why do the consequences of the author’s position seem so important to him?” –Search for similar social controversies, in order to find analogue value assumptions. –Use reverse role-playing, by taking his position. –Look for usual value conflicts.

4. What are the descriptive assumptions? - 1 When we identify descriptive assumptions, we find the link between a reason and the author’s conclusion, and it may be flawed. When we identify descriptive assumptions, we find the link between a reason and the author’s conclusion, and it may be flawed. We want to accept a conclusion only if there are good reasons that lead to the conclusion on the basis of the descriptive assumptions. We want to accept a conclusion only if there are good reasons that lead to the conclusion on the basis of the descriptive assumptions.

5. What are the descriptive assumptions? - 2 Clues to finding them: Clues to finding them: –Keep thinking about the gap between conclusion and reasons. –Look for ideas that support reasons. –Identify with the opposition. –Recognize the potential existence of other means for attaining the advantages referred in the reasons. –Learn more about the issues.

6. The Socratic method - 1 What do you mean by _____________ ? What do you mean by _____________ ? How did you come to that conclusion? How did you come to that conclusion? Why do you believe that you are right? Why do you believe that you are right? What is the source of your information? What is the source of your information? What assumption has led you to that conclusion? What assumption has led you to that conclusion? (see Wikipedia)

7. The Socratic method - 2 What happens if you are wrong? What happens if you are wrong? Can you give me two sources who disagree with you and explain why? Can you give me two sources who disagree with you and explain why? Why is this significant? Does it matter? Why is this significant? Does it matter? How do I know you are telling me the truth? How do I know you are telling me the truth? What is an alternate explanation for this phenomenon? What is an alternate explanation for this phenomenon?

8. Best Practice Precepts [... next] Arguments Arguments Possibility of the Impossible Possibility of the Impossible Belief, Truth, and Reality Belief, Truth, and Reality Knowledge, Belief, and Evidence Knowledge, Belief, and Evidence Error Error Scientific Thinking Scientific Thinking Bias Bias

9. Arguments - 1 A. Itemize opinions from all relevant sides of an issue and collect logical arguments supporting each. B. Break the arguments into their constituent statements and draw out various additional implications from these statements. C. Examine these statements and implications for internal contradictions.

10. Arguments - 2 D. Locate opposing claims between the various arguments and assign relative weightings to opposing claims: –Increase the weighting when the claims have strong support, especially distinct chains of reasoning or different news sources, decrease the weighting when the claims have contradictions. –...

11. Arguments - 3 –Adjust weighting depending on relevance of information to central issue. –Require sufficient support to justify any incredible claims. –Otherwise, ignore these claims when forming a judgment. E. Assess the weights of the various claims.

12. Arguments - 4 F. Once we have identified an argument, we identify keywords or phrases within its reasoning, that might have alternative well-defined meanings. G. We determine whether or not the author explicitly uses one of those definitions. If not, and one of them changes our acceptance of the conclusion, then an ambiguity has been identified. H. This is an important step in accepting or not some conclusion.

13. Possibility of the Impossible - 1 A. Just because something is logically possible doesn’t mean that it’s real. B. Just because a claim hasn’t been conclusively refuted doesn’t mean that it’s true. C. Just because a claim hasn’t been conclusively proven doesn’t mean that it’s false.

14. Possibility of the Impossible - 2 D. Just because something seems physically impossible doesn’t mean that it is. E. Just because something is physically possible doesn’t mean that it’s real. F. One can’t believe impossible things. G. We have to live today by what truth we can get today, and be ready tomorrow to call it falsehood.